[dpdk-dev] [PATCH] eal: resort symbols in EXPERIMENTAL section

[dpdk-dev] [PATCH] eal: resort symbols in EXPERIMENTAL section

[Stephen Hemminger]

The symbols in the EXPERIMENTAL were close to alphabetic
order but running sort showed several mistakes.

This has no impact on code, API, ABI or otherwise.
Purely for humans.

Signed-off-by: Stephen Hemminger <stephen@networkplumber.org>
---
 lib/librte_eal/rte_eal_version.map | 36 +++++++++++++++---------------
 1 file changed, 18 insertions(+), 18 deletions(-)

diff --git a/lib/librte_eal/rte_eal_version.map b/lib/librte_eal/rte_eal_version.map
index d6e375135ad1..33f2c303a361 100644
--- a/lib/librte_eal/rte_eal_version.map
+++ b/lib/librte_eal/rte_eal_version.map
@@ -277,6 +277,14 @@ EXPERIMENTAL {
 	rte_class_unregister;
 	rte_ctrl_thread_create;
 	rte_delay_us_sleep;
+	rte_devargs_add;
+	rte_devargs_dump;
+	rte_devargs_insert;
+	rte_devargs_next;
+	rte_devargs_parse;
+	rte_devargs_parsef;
+	rte_devargs_remove;
+	rte_devargs_type_count;
 	rte_dev_dma_map;
 	rte_dev_dma_unmap;
 	rte_dev_event_callback_process;
@@ -289,14 +297,6 @@ EXPERIMENTAL {
 	rte_dev_is_probed;
 	rte_dev_iterator_init;
 	rte_dev_iterator_next;
-	rte_devargs_add;
-	rte_devargs_dump;
-	rte_devargs_insert;
-	rte_devargs_next;
-	rte_devargs_parse;
-	rte_devargs_parsef;
-	rte_devargs_remove;
-	rte_devargs_type_count;
 	rte_eal_cleanup;
 	rte_extmem_attach;
 	rte_extmem_detach;
@@ -306,19 +306,19 @@ EXPERIMENTAL {
 	rte_fbarray_destroy;
 	rte_fbarray_detach;
 	rte_fbarray_dump_metadata;
-	rte_fbarray_find_idx;
 	rte_fbarray_find_biggest_free;
 	rte_fbarray_find_biggest_used;
+	rte_fbarray_find_contig_free;
+	rte_fbarray_find_contig_used;
+	rte_fbarray_find_idx;
 	rte_fbarray_find_next_free;
-	rte_fbarray_find_next_used;
 	rte_fbarray_find_next_n_free;
 	rte_fbarray_find_next_n_used;
+	rte_fbarray_find_next_used;
 	rte_fbarray_find_prev_free;
-	rte_fbarray_find_prev_used;
 	rte_fbarray_find_prev_n_free;
 	rte_fbarray_find_prev_n_used;
-	rte_fbarray_find_contig_free;
-	rte_fbarray_find_contig_used;
+	rte_fbarray_find_prev_used;
 	rte_fbarray_find_rev_biggest_free;
 	rte_fbarray_find_rev_biggest_used;
 	rte_fbarray_find_rev_contig_free;
@@ -346,24 +346,24 @@ EXPERIMENTAL {
 	rte_mem_event_callback_register;
 	rte_mem_event_callback_unregister;
 	rte_mem_iova2virt;
-	rte_mem_set_dma_mask;
-	rte_mem_virt2memseg;
-	rte_mem_virt2memseg_list;
 	rte_memseg_contig_walk;
 	rte_memseg_contig_walk_thread_unsafe;
 	rte_memseg_get_fd;
 	rte_memseg_get_fd_offset;
-	rte_memseg_get_fd_thread_unsafe;
 	rte_memseg_get_fd_offset_thread_unsafe;
+	rte_memseg_get_fd_thread_unsafe;
 	rte_memseg_list_walk;
 	rte_memseg_list_walk_thread_unsafe;
 	rte_memseg_walk;
 	rte_memseg_walk_thread_unsafe;
+	rte_mem_set_dma_mask;
+	rte_mem_virt2memseg;
+	rte_mem_virt2memseg_list;
 	rte_mp_action_register;
 	rte_mp_action_unregister;
 	rte_mp_reply;
-	rte_mp_request_sync;
 	rte_mp_request_async;
+	rte_mp_request_sync;
 	rte_mp_sendmsg;
 	rte_option_register;
 	rte_realloc_socket;
-- 
2.17.1

[dpdk-dev] [PATCH] eal: resort symbols in EXPERIMENTAL section

[Stephen Hemminger]

The symbols in the EXPERIMENTAL were close to alphabetic
order but running sort showed several mistakes.

This has no impact on code, API, ABI or otherwise.
Purely for humans.

Signed-off-by: Stephen Hemminger <stephen@networkplumber.org>
---
 lib/librte_eal/rte_eal_version.map | 36 +++++++++++++++---------------
 1 file changed, 18 insertions(+), 18 deletions(-)

diff --git a/lib/librte_eal/rte_eal_version.map b/lib/librte_eal/rte_eal_version.map
index d6e375135ad1..33f2c303a361 100644
--- a/lib/librte_eal/rte_eal_version.map
+++ b/lib/librte_eal/rte_eal_version.map
@@ -277,6 +277,14 @@ EXPERIMENTAL {
 	rte_class_unregister;
 	rte_ctrl_thread_create;
 	rte_delay_us_sleep;
+	rte_devargs_add;
+	rte_devargs_dump;
+	rte_devargs_insert;
+	rte_devargs_next;
+	rte_devargs_parse;
+	rte_devargs_parsef;
+	rte_devargs_remove;
+	rte_devargs_type_count;
 	rte_dev_dma_map;
 	rte_dev_dma_unmap;
 	rte_dev_event_callback_process;
@@ -289,14 +297,6 @@ EXPERIMENTAL {
 	rte_dev_is_probed;
 	rte_dev_iterator_init;
 	rte_dev_iterator_next;
-	rte_devargs_add;
-	rte_devargs_dump;
-	rte_devargs_insert;
-	rte_devargs_next;
-	rte_devargs_parse;
-	rte_devargs_parsef;
-	rte_devargs_remove;
-	rte_devargs_type_count;
 	rte_eal_cleanup;
 	rte_extmem_attach;
 	rte_extmem_detach;
@@ -306,19 +306,19 @@ EXPERIMENTAL {
 	rte_fbarray_destroy;
 	rte_fbarray_detach;
 	rte_fbarray_dump_metadata;
-	rte_fbarray_find_idx;
 	rte_fbarray_find_biggest_free;
 	rte_fbarray_find_biggest_used;
+	rte_fbarray_find_contig_free;
+	rte_fbarray_find_contig_used;
+	rte_fbarray_find_idx;
 	rte_fbarray_find_next_free;
-	rte_fbarray_find_next_used;
 	rte_fbarray_find_next_n_free;
 	rte_fbarray_find_next_n_used;
+	rte_fbarray_find_next_used;
 	rte_fbarray_find_prev_free;
-	rte_fbarray_find_prev_used;
 	rte_fbarray_find_prev_n_free;
 	rte_fbarray_find_prev_n_used;
-	rte_fbarray_find_contig_free;
-	rte_fbarray_find_contig_used;
+	rte_fbarray_find_prev_used;
 	rte_fbarray_find_rev_biggest_free;
 	rte_fbarray_find_rev_biggest_used;
 	rte_fbarray_find_rev_contig_free;
@@ -346,24 +346,24 @@ EXPERIMENTAL {
 	rte_mem_event_callback_register;
 	rte_mem_event_callback_unregister;
 	rte_mem_iova2virt;
-	rte_mem_set_dma_mask;
-	rte_mem_virt2memseg;
-	rte_mem_virt2memseg_list;
 	rte_memseg_contig_walk;
 	rte_memseg_contig_walk_thread_unsafe;
 	rte_memseg_get_fd;
 	rte_memseg_get_fd_offset;
-	rte_memseg_get_fd_thread_unsafe;
 	rte_memseg_get_fd_offset_thread_unsafe;
+	rte_memseg_get_fd_thread_unsafe;
 	rte_memseg_list_walk;
 	rte_memseg_list_walk_thread_unsafe;
 	rte_memseg_walk;
 	rte_memseg_walk_thread_unsafe;
+	rte_mem_set_dma_mask;
+	rte_mem_virt2memseg;
+	rte_mem_virt2memseg_list;
 	rte_mp_action_register;
 	rte_mp_action_unregister;
 	rte_mp_reply;
-	rte_mp_request_sync;
 	rte_mp_request_async;
+	rte_mp_request_sync;
 	rte_mp_sendmsg;
 	rte_option_register;
 	rte_realloc_socket;
-- 
2.17.1

Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] eal: resort symbols in EXPERIMENTAL section

[Thomas Monjalon]

06/04/2019 05:30, Stephen Hemminger:
> The symbols in the EXPERIMENTAL were close to alphabetic
> order but running sort showed several mistakes.
> 
> This has no impact on code, API, ABI or otherwise.
> Purely for humans.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Stephen Hemminger <stephen@networkplumber.org>

I don't think it's worth adding a layer of git history for this sort.
I would prefer to leave it as is.

Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] eal: resort symbols in EXPERIMENTAL section

[David Marchand]

On Fri, Jun 14, 2019 at 9:39 AM Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net> wrote:

> 06/04/2019 05:30, Stephen Hemminger:
> > The symbols in the EXPERIMENTAL were close to alphabetic
> > order but running sort showed several mistakes.
> >
> > This has no impact on code, API, ABI or otherwise.
> > Purely for humans.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Stephen Hemminger <stephen@networkplumber.org>
>
> I don't think it's worth adding a layer of git history for this sort.
> I would prefer to leave it as is.
>
>
If this is about preferrence, I would prefer we have those symbols sorted
per versions that introduced them ;-).
Much easier to check and see if they are candidates for entering stable ABI.


-- 
David Marchand

Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] eal: resort symbols in EXPERIMENTAL section

[Ferruh Yigit]

On 6/14/2019 8:44 AM, David Marchand wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 14, 2019 at 9:39 AM Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net> wrote:
> 
>> 06/04/2019 05:30, Stephen Hemminger:
>>> The symbols in the EXPERIMENTAL were close to alphabetic
>>> order but running sort showed several mistakes.
>>>
>>> This has no impact on code, API, ABI or otherwise.
>>> Purely for humans.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Stephen Hemminger <stephen@networkplumber.org>
>>
>> I don't think it's worth adding a layer of git history for this sort.
>> I would prefer to leave it as is.
>>
>>
> If this is about preferrence, I would prefer we have those symbols sorted
> per versions that introduced them ;-).
> Much easier to check and see if they are candidates for entering stable ABI.
> 

Not bad idea, +1 from my side J

Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] eal: resort symbols in EXPERIMENTAL section

[David Marchand]

On Fri, Jun 14, 2019 at 5:32 PM Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yigit@intel.com> wrote:

> On 6/14/2019 8:44 AM, David Marchand wrote:
> > On Fri, Jun 14, 2019 at 9:39 AM Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net>
> wrote:
> >
> >> 06/04/2019 05:30, Stephen Hemminger:
> >>> The symbols in the EXPERIMENTAL were close to alphabetic
> >>> order but running sort showed several mistakes.
> >>>
> >>> This has no impact on code, API, ABI or otherwise.
> >>> Purely for humans.
> >>>
> >>> Signed-off-by: Stephen Hemminger <stephen@networkplumber.org>
> >>
> >> I don't think it's worth adding a layer of git history for this sort.
> >> I would prefer to leave it as is.
> >>
> >>
> > If this is about preferrence, I would prefer we have those symbols sorted
> > per versions that introduced them ;-).
> > Much easier to check and see if they are candidates for entering stable
> ABI.
> >
>
> Not bad idea, +1 from my side J
>

Here is what it looks like:
https://github.com/david-marchand/dpdk/commit/cab0d75ea6bdc7782566d7aad6718b9f5fa784f7

Comments?


-- 
David Marchand

Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] eal: resort symbols in EXPERIMENTAL section

[David Marchand]

On Thu, Jun 20, 2019 at 7:23 PM David Marchand
<david.marchand@redhat.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> On Fri, Jun 14, 2019 at 5:32 PM Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yigit@intel.com> wrote:
>>
>> On 6/14/2019 8:44 AM, David Marchand wrote:
>> > On Fri, Jun 14, 2019 at 9:39 AM Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net> wrote:
>> >
>> >> 06/04/2019 05:30, Stephen Hemminger:
>> >>> The symbols in the EXPERIMENTAL were close to alphabetic
>> >>> order but running sort showed several mistakes.
>> >>>
>> >>> This has no impact on code, API, ABI or otherwise.
>> >>> Purely for humans.
>> >>>
>> >>> Signed-off-by: Stephen Hemminger <stephen@networkplumber.org>
>> >>
>> >> I don't think it's worth adding a layer of git history for this sort.
>> >> I would prefer to leave it as is.
>> >>
>> >>
>> > If this is about preferrence, I would prefer we have those symbols sorted
>> > per versions that introduced them ;-).
>> > Much easier to check and see if they are candidates for entering stable ABI.
>> >
>>
>> Not bad idea, +1 from my side J
>
>
> Here is what it looks like:
> https://github.com/david-marchand/dpdk/commit/cab0d75ea6bdc7782566d7aad6718b9f5fa784f7

Sent the patch rebased on master.
https://patchwork.dpdk.org/patch/57172/


-- 
David Marchand